Claims of Racism Must Stop

I have been torn on writing this article for a couple of weeks now. On one hand I had hoped that the current environment would change and this issue would go away on its own. Unfortunately, calling someone a racist is such a magnificently powerful tool that it would be silly to think those in the halls of power would allow it to be put away. So I decided that I was, in fact, going to write about it. And I am going to be honest in my assessment. Because the fact that this is being used as a tactic by many politicians, partisans, and media jerk-offs is about as filthy a statement about their character as any claim they could make about me in the end. So we are going to take some time this evening to point out all the claims of racism in the political realm. Then we will discuss what I think the reality in America is. Finally I will ask for help from all of you to figure out how to stop this tactic from being used to divide the country as much as possible.

Allow me to make my point again, albeit more clearly this time. The claims by those in power, regardless of political party, that use race as a weapon, are false, are divisive, and show them to be of the lowest moral character imaginable. But I am not stopping with politicians, although we should demand more from them. I am talking about celebrities, news outlets, blog writers, businesses, power brokers, EVERYONE. If you use the claim of racism as a reason to demean your ideological opponent(s), when you know that it is not the reason they oppose you, I will come right out and say that you are an absolute piece of shit. Not only have you, at that point, lost all credibility, but you should be punished for sowing the seeds of mistrust, divisiveness, racial tension, ignorance, and intolerance among a people who need to find ways to get together, rather than be further divided.

I had really hoped that the promises of a post-racial America would come to pass with the election of a black man to the Presidency. And in some ways I think that Obama’s election was a great and hopeful sign for America. Blacks make up only 12% of the population. So that meant that plenty of white people did vote to put a black man in the White House (not to mention a man with the name Barack Hussein). I was immediately disappointed to find the hateful tone coming from the black community. It seemed that in the black community, rather than a feeling of togetherness, his election instead brought about a feeling of empowerment. I recall someone, I think Ray but I am not sure, sharing the story of a family member being confronted by a group of blacks proclaiming it was “their” time now. I can’t tell you how many times over the first couple months I heard black Americans making remarks in the arena of this sentiment. Instead of a feeling of finally having inclusion in the American dream, I overwhelmingly felt that it was a feeling of supremacy over white America. A feeling that we would finally “get ours.” And that is simply sad.

But it isn’t the members of the black community that I am angry with at this point. Sure there are some members of the black community that use race as a weapon, claim racism at every turn, and use this tactic (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, NAACP Presidents, Professor Gates). And we all know what I think of them for doing so. No, I am talking about the media, the politicians, etc. I am talking about Keith Olbermann and Jeanine Garofalo. I am talking about Nancy Pelosi and Jimmy Carter. I am talking about Rush Limbaugh. And I want to be honest and open on this subject, but I am finding it hard to keep it from coming to a partisan twist. I have literally sat here for an hour searching the web and I could not find much of anything in any searches that turned up a story about Republicans or conservatives calling Democrats or liberals racists, with the exception of some of the more radical conservative commentary folks singling out an individual. No examples I could find of “Democrats hate black people”. For Example:

Sean Hannity has had several sections of his commentary aimed at the idea that perhaps the Obamas have some race issues themselves. He stated, “As more is learned about Barack Obama’s positions, his past, and his affiliations, it seems that the ‘change’ candidate has all the same problems with race as those before him,” and later added, “It’s only fair to ask: Do the Obamas have a race problem of their own?” While not quite as bad as many of the blatant examples we see from the left, but an insinuation that Obama is racist none-the-less.

Glenn Beck, guilty of calling President Obama a racist as well. Beck went on Fox and Friends and stated that Obama is a “racist” and has “exposed himself as a guy” who has “a deep-seated hatred for white people. No two ways around that. Beck came right out and said the President is a racist! I have to admit that when I read that I was stunned. I simply didn’t think Beck would sink so low.

Rush Limbaugh. Well, he just gives us example after example out of his pie hole. First he says that Colin Powell only supported Obama because he was black. Then he makes a comment that in Obama’s new America, white kids get beaten while black kids stand around and cheer. He follows that up with saying that Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is racist and that the way to get promoted in the Obama administration is to hate white people. Rush deserves a smack in the teeth for comments like these. He is doing nothing but feeding into the stereotype that Republicans are racist.

But the reality is that the claim of racist in today’s political arena is OVERWHELMINGLY a liberal tactic.

I am not kidding you here. I typed this into google: “Republicans calling Democrats Racists” Here is the first page of returned results:

Take a look at that list. I asked for Republicans calling Democrats racists, and nine of the top ten results were instances of Republicans being called racist by Democrats! The only one that wasn’t was an article claiming that Michael Steele, a black man, was calling Obama a racist for not supporting Michael Patterson, another black man. (Forget that in the article it actually quotes “Baffled, Schiefer blurted, “You don’t think he’s asked him not to run because he’s black?” “I don’t think that, but look, you have so few [black governors],” Steele said. “Look, if you’re saying it’s the numbers then why isn’t there a call for those other Democrat governors who have low numbers as well. It’s just a curiosity for me.”) So the only example in the top ten results was a blatant lie. Think I am making that up? I gave you the term I put in, do the search yourself and see.

The reality is that today, right now, the racist card is being played by the left, over and over again. It isn’t the Republican party playing this card nearly as frequently as Democrats. And while my searches may have missed an example or two that someone on the left will bring up to attempt to show it goes both ways, the fact is that unless you can find hundreds of examples, it doesn’t go both ways. Because even a rudimentary search turns up hundreds of examples of Republicans and opponents of Obama’s policies being called racists. While the examples from the right all seem to ask whether a single person is racist, the left’s attacks tend to target an entire party. Allow me to point out some examples to show how widespread and high up this tactic is being employed.

Jeanine Garofalo goes on MSNBC with Keith Olbermann and claims that the tea parties are nothing but a bunch of racist white rednecks. She claims that opposition to Obama’s policies and plans is nothing more than evidence of racism in America. Olbermann not only allows this to stand, he agrees with her. He has made the claim of racism against Republicans no less than 40 times on air.

We have Congresswoman Diane Watson from the LA area making a speech in which she comes right out and says about Republicans, “And remember: They are spreading fear and they are trying to see that the first president that looks likes me fails. Now just understand what’s at the bottom line.” (Forget about the fact that she has race baited for years and chastised a black Republican for marrying a white woman, claimed Congress was keeping DC from having representation in Congress because DC is a “Chocolate City” and would elect black Senators, and ramped up all the rhetoric over Hurricane Katrina being a racial issue).

The ever popular Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi chimed in with her comments insinuating that the language from the right reminds her of the anti gay rhetoric in San Francisco, which resulted in violence. She pretended to be concerned for the safety of the American people should this rhetoric from the right continue. (Forget the fact that the claims of racism as the driver of opposition are only coming from the left, which she is the anointed leader of).

In one of the absolute worst moments for race relations in this country, we have a former President of the United States, Jimmy Carter, come out and say that opposition to Obama’s policies is driven by race. He stated, “I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he’s African-American. I live in the South, and I’ve seen the South come a long way, and I’ve seen the rest of the country that share the South’s attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African-Americans. That racism in connection still exists, and I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of a belief among many white people, not just in the South, but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It’s an abominable circumstance and grieves me and concerns me very deeply.”

Let me add about Carter, this statement from him really saddened me. He was a horrible President. Horrible. But in the years since, he has proven to be such a great diplomat. He has done so many good things for this country after leaving the White House. And he ruined every bit of it in my eyes with this comment. It was one of the most irresponsible statements that I have ever heard a President of the United States make. I expect more from a President. He made a claim that was not only false, but damaging to race relations in so many ways. He should be ashamed of himself for saying what he did.

Maureen Dowd, widely read liberal columnist went on an extended screed against Joe Wilson, laying out the case for why his outburst was completely racially motivated. She said, “Joe Wilson yelled “You lie!” at a president who didn’t. But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!” Oh she got better, because she didn’t want to stop at Wilson, she had to take the whole Republican party to task by finishing up with, “Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.” Another reason why I will never read Dowd’s trash writing. She has the credibility rating ranking right up there with Limbaugh.

Some of the absolute most maddening stuff is the absolute intentional lying that goes on at some of our biggest news media outlets.

MSNBC does a piece about weapons being brought to an Obama rally out west. They zero in one of the 12 people and the semi-automatic weapon strapped to his back. They railed on for nearly 30 minutes about how this was about racism. They portrayed the entire issue as a race issue, claimed we have white people showing up to rallies with guns. They said we will see someone take a shot at Obama, because of racism. One problem, they cropped the photo to show the man only from the shoulders down, because the man carrying the weapon was black.

MSNBC's On-Air Version

You get the point. These claims are coming from every angle that can possibly be used. The bottom line is this. The liberal world has decided that the best way to trivialize, demonize, and marginalize the conservative right in this country is to call them a racist. This is not a new tactic. They have been doing it for decades. Do some research, you will find it over and over again. But now the ante has been upped. Now there is a black man in the white house. So it makes laying the claim of racism so much easier. Don’t agree with health care reform, its because you are a racist. Voted for McCain, it was because you can’t accept a black man as President. Oppose the social reform that increases welfare and the like, it is because you want to see black people in America fail. No matter the political issue, the left can point to racism as the reason why you don’t agree to their position. And they are doing it with everything.

The Actual Version

And as the left continues to use this tactic ever so effectively in today’s political spectrum, they are teaching this generation and the ones that follow that the claim of racism is an effective and expedient political tool. Moreover, they are teaching them that it is an acceptable tool, and that the target doesn’t have to have a racist bone in their body to justify using it. It doesn’t matter if the racism is real or contrived, it only matters if the claim is effective. And this is a disgusting tactic to use. I would expect those on the left to condemn this tactic, yet so many seem to accept it and go on their merry way. The sad thing is that I often struggle to think of many prominent black political leaders that have not used race as a weapon at some point (and that includes out President who used it against Hillary).

The problem is that the people who should be shouting the loudest about this abuse of the term racist are the most silent on the subject: black people in America. They should be outraged to see what has been a real life struggle for so many reduced to a political tactic. It trivializes the struggle that Martin Luther King so gallantly tackled. I should note that Dr. King would have deplored this. They should be outraged because with the ever increasing claims of racism today it trivializes the legitimate claims of racism. No one pays attention to a claim of racism when nearly everyone is being accused of it. It allows the true racists to continue on their way.

But the biggest problem of all with this is not the impact on policy. And those feeling the pain from the overuse of the racist claim will never be those politicians or columnists or celebrities that use it for political gain. It will be the rest of us. Because they are CREATING racial tension, racial hatred, and bigotry in America in a generation of Americans who were not raised with that being the reality. Calling someone a racists is one of the most emotionally charged horrible slanders that can be thrown. Those that are accused of it are hurt and angered. And as a result, they become bitter, and some even become the racists that they weren’t before. It creates a wedge in a divide that was slowly closing. It begins to open that divide up again.

And much as I have often said, it is that divide in the American people that keeps Washington from being held accountable. So long as those on the left continue to believe that those on the right are racist scum, they will never come together to find out the truth. Much like politicians keeping democrats and republicans hating each other, they are also keeping blacks and whites separated. As someone who’s three closest friends over the last 20 years were a black man, a Korean, and a Filipino, I can only say that we have a lot to learn from each other. And that will never happen so long as we permit these assholes with a microphone to keep us divided for their own benefit.

The claims of racism for political gain where racism isn’t the actual issue are the lowest form of slander in today’s America. It is time that we stood up to those who use it. Those on the left have to begin holding the liberal media, Democratic politicians, and liberal celebrities accountable. Boycott, reprimand, refuse to vote for, do whatever you can to show them that this tactic is no longer acceptable. Those on the right have to do the same when Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck make claims like they do. Racism is real. It isn’t a game. It may not be nearly as bad as it was 40 years ago, but it is still there. And its use as a political tool has to stop.

Comments

Interesting subject USW! Hope the Mrs. is getting better by the day, pass on the get well soon wishes.

I will say that the race card issue is old. Over the last two days, there has been much discussion about welfare reform. I do not recall having read anything that equated welfare with any particular race. That’s because welfare has nothing to do with race, but is a society as a whole problem. I actually thought to myself how nice it was to talk about welfare without race being an issue, and credited it to the intelligence of those that post here. However, I’m sure if some left wing blog picked up on it, we would all be deemed racist.

Admit it.. you hate him because he’s black. We all know no one here has any legitimate grievances with him over policy. All you can see is his skin color. Come on, admitting it will make you feel better. I, as a liberal, know the right thing to do would be to support Genghis Khan for President if he were black, because this is only reasonable given this country’s history of black oppression. Because black men and women were once slaves and overtly discriminated against, we are morally bound to ignore anything we do not like from the first black President and blindly support him. To do otherwise is tantamount to endorsing Jim Crow laws. Of course, you all probably think there’s nothing wrong with making him ride in the back of the limo while the whites get to ride up front! Racists! The lot of you! For shame…

Phew.. I was worried that my sarcasm wouldn’t be picked up (that happens sometimes online)..

That said, this is something of the boy who cried wolf. This country does have a legitimate problem with racism. I still remember seeing the “Vote Right, Vote White” signs that were waved around during the election. I still remember how the woman in the town hall said to McCain, “I don’t trust him, he’s a Muslim.” I remember my city going insane after Rodney King. I remember Watts. I remember how, after 9/11, people would glare at anyone of Middle Eastern ethnicity as if they, too, must be a terrorist. I remember how Tancredo ran in the primary on a platform of immigrant bashing and xenophobia – and didn’t do too poorly. And, as a Jew, I have been personally accused of being a part of the liberal elite who control the media (a poll a few months ago found that 1/3 Europeans believed the Jews were behind the collapse).

And beyond that, some members of the Republican Party are guilty of using dog whistle politics to stoke the fears of the racists out there. They call Obama “exotic” because they can’t come straight out and say “different from you,” and a million other dirty little tricks. Is this the majority? No. Is this representative of the party on the whole? No. But they are out there. Here’s Tricky Dick, for you:

Richard Nixon

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that… but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats. [He then went on to shake his jowells and insist that he is not a crook, but th

Can you tell me that this has entirely disappeared for the Republican Platform? 100%?

So to conclude, there is still some racism out there, and there are still some politicians who are trying to take advantage of it. Just because the left is crying wolf left and right, do not be deluded into believing that there are no actual wolves out there. There very much are. But I do think the left should shut the hell up unless there is an actual certifiable instance that needs to be called out.

Though I would say that the Democrats didn’t have the Southern Strategy.

My quick Google search says that 15% of Americans won’t vote for a black President (another search said 24%). Take those numbers for what they’re worth, but let’s call it 10%. That means that for 1 in 10 Americans, the President’s skin color overrides everything else about him. That is a serious problem in America. Racism is alive and well.

I disagree with you just a ‘lil bit on this. I believe the “preferencism” is alive and will always be there. I believe that “racism”, while it cannot be totally eradicated is dying slowly and painfully in the US and will mostly be gone in a few more generations.

I also believe that “nationalism” is on the rise and will continue to rise until something is done to address illegal aliens and the various tax breaks given to legal immigrants that US Citizens do not get.

You have to look, somewhat, at motivation. Firstly, I am not saying that blacks who voted for him only because of his race are right. They are not. And what’s more, they are idiots. But they see it as a question of “it’s our turn” and “finally, we’ve reached the top,” and “we’re no longer and underclass,” etc. So they vote for him because they think his example, his success will set a precedent for the rest of them. It’s not because they think us honkies are inferior, or that they don’t trust us, or that he will do a better job. Many of them lived through the civil rights era and seeing a black President has been an unthinkable thing their whole lives.

So no, it’s no OK, and it’s not right, but it’s not racism either – it’s something else. Racism is discriminatory – they vote against you for your skin color. This is the opposite, you get bonus points for it, kind of like affirmative action.

I don’t buy that definition. Judging someone good or bad based on their race is racism.

Sorry, I just don’t buy that definition. What you’ve just explained is Liberal twisting. The logic can be used to declare the KKK as a white civil rights group. Whites these days are persecuted for their skin color, therefore, that’s racism. The KKK thinks white people are good, so that makes it affirmative action when the KKK acts on behalf of whites, thus the KKK is a white civil rights organization to be protected by law. Don’t being saying anything bad about the KKK. We have hate speech laws in the works….

Blacks have a higher incidence of sickle-cell anemia, sudden-onset high blood pressure and high cholesterol. If I am a doctor and I want to put my black patient on blood thinners and/or cholesterol medicine as a precaution, is that racist?

Lousy analogy, but you made a sweeping claim and I felt like proving you wrong.

Nelson Mandela got his Nobel for sitting in jail. It was his wife Winny who did all the damage to Apartheid and with regard to her what wasn’t reported was the rest of the iceberg.

Also the current incarnation of POTUS getting the award for having actually accomplished nothing tangible outside of America save for his part in the AIG-$$$->EU Banks pipeline is indeed laughable. As another said elsewhere, there’s more tangible results from Bush’s policies in Africa than Obama’s rhetoric.

This even cheapens it for world renown terrorists like yasser arafat, but hey look at the list of who won it in the past. If your not a marxist or terrorist your chances of winning are less than .00005%.
I hope my sarcasm is picked up as well.

On a different Nobel note – I am curious on others thoughts and sentiments regarding others who have won the Nobel in a particular area – economics, chemistry, physics, etc – are those areas as prone to ‘popularity contesting’ as the Peace Prize? I’ve often looked at that list and thought – ‘this is who I should read’. Thoughts anyone?

It’s almost funny given the current incarnation of POTUS being selected for one.

“The Nobel laureates are selected by their respective Nobel Committees. For the Prizes in Physics, Chemistry and Economics, a committee consists of five members elected by The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; for the Prize in Literature, a committee of four to five members of the Swedish Academy; for the Prize in Physiology or Medicine, the committee consists of five members selected by The Nobel Assembly, which consists of 50 members elected by Karolinska Institutet; for the Peace Prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee consists of five members elected by the Norwegian Storting (the Norwegian parliament).[9] In its first stage, several thousand people are asked to nominate candidates. These names are scrutinized and discussed by experts in their specific disciplines until only the winners remain. This slow and thorough process is arguably what gives the prize its importance. Despite this, there have been questionable awards and questionable omissions over the prize’s century-long history.” – Wiki

“This week Norwegians voted to defend their generous welfare state and rejected parties proposing tax cuts, privatization and a crackdown on immigration. German commentators argue that the center-left government can only maintain the current system because of the country’s massive oil wealth.” – SPIEGEL ONLINE International

They are the only socialist government left in Scandinavia. The only government left who can afford to be too.

In H.L. Mencken’s diary, he routinely counseled his friends to refuse both the Nobel prize in literature and the Pulitzer prize. Mencken observed that most winners of these awards immediately began to produce much less impressive work, and he regarded the business of giving out such awards to be something worthy of the lowest (or perhaps highest) form of contempt

Go for it – the prize is 1,000,000 Euros (roughly $1.4mm). Of course, you’d need to pay taxes on that…

As for why he got it, I have a theory. You see, Bush set the bar for international relations with America so low that all Obama had to do to impress the international community was have a pulse. So, he apologizes for the last eight years (and he should, damnit, we f***ed up everything for a decade). With us or against us? Yea, that’s the way to win friends and influence people. We brow beat and bullied the entire planet. We refused to budge on global warming (whether you believe this is an issue or not, the rest of the world does, and we’re (currently) the biggest polluter). We invaded two countries, one of which did not attack us. We saber rattled with Russia and destabilized Eastern Europe. And the list goes on.. and we did it all with a smug cowboy arrogance that said “screw the rest of the world, we’re only out for ourselves.

So for Obama to usher in a new era of international relations, all he had to do was to not nuke Norway before the peace prize was awarded. And say what you like about his fiscal policy, I think he’s doing a pretty good job with international relations. We should be feared and loved. Not just feared. We can’t fix the world alone, and he at least knows that. (Queue barrage of arguments).

WOW…
Two key White House aides were both convinced they were being punked when they heard the news, reported ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos.
“It’s not April 1, is it?” one said.
Upon being called by ABC News at 5:45 ET this morning, a White House aide said, “This better be good.”
When told by ABC News that the president had won the Nobel Peace Prize, the aide replied: “Oh, that is good.”

I throw the bullshit flag on this argument. Obama does not deserve the peace prize because he apologized for Bush’s actions.

I think this prize is more of a political statement. It is not awarded to people who have done great things (anymore), but to those the world wants to do great things. I think it’s a load of crap to give it to Gore or Obama compared to the other people up for the award…

Ask his pet hobbit Tim Geithner about it and he’ll tell you that Nobel was bought and paid for in full through AIG to the tune of $58 billion dollars. Mind you Jabba the Gore got his Nobel for “Best Science Fiction Powerpoint Presentation” so maybe the current incarnation of POTUS got his for the yet to be published “Declaration of Amalgamation” of the new World Consensus.

In the last few days, as we’ve heard Nobel Prizes being awarded for science, literature, etc, my wife and I were talking about the Nobel Peace Prize. There wasn’t a name or action from the past year that jumped out at us. After a few moments of silence, I said “Oh no, do you think it could be…”

She said “No…”

When I heard the announcement this morning, my first thought was what would the reaction be out here…

Many on this blog have criticized the very things that were listed by the Nobel committee.

But when I compare Bush’s attitude to the world with Obama’s attitude to the world, I think Obama has had a significant impact on improving the prospects of world peace…so blame it on Bush…or in this case maybe give Bush the credit…

It is not just with Obama either, look at the situation with Charlie Rangle (?), everyone is getting mad because people want to step down from the seat he holds. Claiming it is because he is black. No its because you have not claimed over half of your income in over 7years! Which you have not paid any taxes on.

Sorry, Ellen, you are way off base here. The reason people want Rangle to step down has to be because he is black. How very racist of you to presume otherwise. Don’t you know that Congress is above the law?

Well, I must be a racist. I live in the south, employ blacks, women and gays
(others welcome, but must be legal). And I think our president is a small “r”
racist. Why do I THINK that? Lets take a look.

who are the racists in this story? Gates accused a decent, decorated, above-reproach police officer of being a racist rogue cop, just because he was white. What did our esteemed “black” president do? He immediately took Gates’ side, because he’s a friend and black! Um, Mr. President, I thought you were going to help erase the racial lines that divide us? Shame on you for taking sides on something you admitted you knew nothing about, for commenting nationally on a small, local issue well beneath your pay grade, and for showing us all that you are not that different that the racist Gates who believes all white cops are bad cops, just because of their skin color.

Fox News: The nation’s only black senator, Barack Obama, D-Ill., asked voters at two black churches and at a Nashville rally to elect Ford, a Democrat who is trying to become the first black senator from the South in more than 100 years.

“I know that all of you are going to work the next couple of days to make sure it happens, because I’m feeling lonely in Washington,”Obama said at the Mt. Zion Baptist Church.”I need my dear friend to join me.”

And it doesn’t stop there for the senator and presidential hopeful. The quote below is taken from Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father”:

There was something about him that made me wary,” Obama wrote. “A little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.”

It’s known that Obama favors racial preferences for select minorities in both the business world and academia. And from the quotes above, so does Oprah. With this evidence, it could be concluded that Obama, and is main supporter, Oprah, are both racist? If not, maybe it’s just black pride?

Obama’s church, Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ once adopted a Black Value System. Here are their main points as written by a committee:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

Would it be acceptable for any Caucasian to subscribe to a church that had ”dedication to the white family” or “strengthening and supporting white institutions?” I don’t think so! In the United States, we believe in innocence until proven guilty, but we also believe in corroborating evidence.

n “Dreams from My Father” Obama wrote: “I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.” This book also contains an explanation of why Obama joined and remained for 20 years in Trinity United Church of Christ, the church of black liberation theologian Rev. Jeremiah Wright who preached hatred against whites. Obama wrote: “It came about as a choice and not an epiphany”. The core of black liberation theology is black separatism, a movement that, for more than a century, has been opposed to racial integration. Equally troubling is Obama’s church giving a lifetime award to one of our nation’s most racist men, Louis Farrakhan.

Obama’s belief system on race was on full display during the 2008 campaign when, on a Philadelphia radio sports program, he described his grandmother as a “typical white person” who fears blacks.

He sided with a Harvard Professor who was arrest in his own home for disorderly conduct. Without any other facts, I’d be inclined to agree as well. Even with the other facts, I’m still inclined to side with Gates.

I’m curious Mathius -you make this statement like it’s just common sense to side with Gates-is it because he is a Harvard Professor -or because he was in his own home-why are either of these facts grounds for taking his word against a police officers?

If you’re giving a cop a hard time, and he’s in your house, and he has established that no crime is being committed, he should leave. It’s what they’re trained to do. Taking verbal abuse is sometimes part of the job.

He’s not breaking in, he owns the house? OK. He’s a jerk. OK. Then leave! The only reason to arrest the guy is because you are in a pissing contest, and that. is. dumb.

I don’t disagree with your point, But when did the professor prove he owned the house and did the professor do anything that could be deemed threatening-since I wasn’t there I can’t make that assumption without the facts. Just because he’s a professor, or that it was his home isn’t good enough on there own.

The officer stayed with him while Gates went and got his wallet. Afterward, he showed him his driver’s license with his home address. The officer agrees to this time line. They then got into a verbal altercation (they disagree on how this came about). The officer then, rather than leaving, arrested him.

To recap: the officer knew that Gates owned the home. Also, gates is a 59 year old man in an argyle sweater who walks with a cane.

Bull… review that timeline again Mathius. The officer left, Gates followed him outside and continued to yell at him. The officer told Gates to go back inside and stop the verbal assault or face being arrested. Gates stayed and continued. The officer arrested him. Nifty that you left that part out of your “timeline”

My only question is what did the president know or not know about the facts when he spoke. I don’t know, haven’t felt this incident was all that important other than the President needs to learn that in his position of power and influence he has to be very careful before he involves his self in this kind of inflammatory stuff.

So Glenn Beck did the unspeakable, and stated what he thought to be true, that our president is a racist. He based this at least partly on Obama’s membership in a radical church for over 20 years. Is he right?

For an experiment in logic, take the above examples, insert George Bush into them.

Pres. Bush calls black police officer “stupid”.

Pres. Bushes church vows “Commitment to White Church, White Family, White Work Ethic and Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System.

Obama said “you will know me by the people I surround myself with”. Gates was in interesting “mentor”. Van Jones. Who is the FCC “diversity” person, calling for more minorities in the media, just fire the existing persons for being white?

In 2005, President Obama’s current chief diversity officer for the Federal Communications Commission, at the time a representative of the liberal think tank the Center for American Progress, said that fundamental policy changes must be made to white-dominated media in order to solve the problems society faces.

Speaking as a part of the National Radio Project on May 11, 2005, Mark Lloyd said that white Americans are “in a very protected position vis a vis broadcast stations.”

Yes it is obvious by the decisions and written opinions from obama that he is a racist, but if that doesnt close the deal, look at the van jones and mark lloyds he keeps sneaking into his inner circle cabinet through the back door. His present racism is just a continuation of his past with the khalidis, jeremiah wrights, louis farrakhans and their ilk.

The question is what is he planning to do with the race issue?
Are obama and his close racist personell, many that are probably not even on the conservative presses radar, planning on planting riots and dirision amongst the races to help expediate the BLT goals that obama waxed so eloquently about when discussing black seperatism?
Are obama and emanuel trying to create a national crisis so they can bring in martial law so they can seize more control of America and also supress freedom of speech with things like the unfairness doctrine? There trying to pound us with higher medical taxes and next they are going to pound us with cap and trade taxes.

Why does obama want so much contol of America for him and his czars?

I sometimes feel that i am the only one who thinks obamas intentions for America and its future are down right deviously destructive in their desires. I guess tens of millions feel the same way, they just dont want to bring up something so negative as its a party killer and also our afraid of being called a racist. I do understand, i dont like to think that every thing obama does is his way to destroy America. but every day there is new news that obama is very very incompetent or he is doing this crap on purpose. yesterdays news; obama appointed a MAMBLA member and radical gay activist to be Americas safe school czar, not just a normal gay AMerican who respects others views, but a act up type activist who wants to promote his agenda against other Americans will.
Look at all his appointments, their all oxmorons in a sense.
From tax cheat geitner to the racist sotomoyeur to the van jones and k jennings.
Evey front of America is being destroyed from the economy to the military.
Terrorist keep being released and their terrorists bill of rights keep strengthening while Amwerican soldiers keep being brought up on indefensible charges in order to tie them up in court and make a circus of our military and to neuter our soldiers while making the military into a bunch of pencil pushing lawyers to aide the appeasers.

Many recognized that Atillah the Hun had great leadership skills,but his methods trampled many others rights and freedoms. Well many recognize obama has great organizing skills(ACORN & SEIU), will he follow in the footsteps of Atillah and trample our rights and freedoms?

oh, dont feel you have to answer any of my questions , since i am a racist to the state run press and really dont have any issues to be upset with from a mullato president. See i didnt even call him black, im such a racist that i couldnt give him credit for even being black. Ha.

That is why I like Beck so much…he does his research and offers his opinion. If you disagree, he welcomes you to do your own research. If he is wrong, he will immediately come on his next show and admit it.

I’m there with you LOI (and with Glen Beck). I’m surprised USW, that you would include Beck’s comment as being the same as a Garafolo’s. Beck used the same background info that LOI posted to support his comment. Just one incident alone, sitting in the Black Theology church, listening to Wright for 20 years, is enough to convince me that BO’s not exactly looking through post-racial eyes. You add in his own quotes from his books, his Gates comment, yes I believe he is a racist.

I’m with you. BHO sitting in that excuse for a church, really concerned me. What sort of person would listen to that hatred for 20 years if they didn’t agree with what was being said? Either BHO agrees with it, or he was using those people for political means. Either way, is this the kind of man was need/want as President?

I like Glenn Beck and record his show daily. I wish he had not used the term racist and stated his view another way. I know it is semantics but it would sound better. I also wish he had not stated that McCain would make a worse president than Obama, even though I understand his point.

Hi Birdman, There was a time when I would have winced at hearing Beck’s comments, but I am through tip-toeing and playing nice. I think Beck used reasoning to support his words and stated what a lot of people were thinking. He’s taken a lot of heat for it, but his ratings continue to climb, so I guess we know where the people stand on these issues.

No one asks how Mr. Obama could sit in that church with his daughters and not get up and leave when the anti white venum started. How could any father sit there and let his children hear someone tear down his country and 80% of its people? If the roles were reversed, i.e. black hatred preached from the pulpit of the church I grew up in, my Dad would not have hesitated to get up and walk out taking us kids with him. How come these questions are never asked? What was he teaching those kids?

“Today’s “black” problem is underdevelopment, not discrimination. Success in modernity will demand profound cultural changes — changes in child-rearing, a restoration of marriage and family, a focus on academic rigor, a greater appreciation of entrepreneurialism and an embrace of individual development as the best road to group development. ” – Shelby Steele

Don’t be too shocked, but I agree with Rush Limbaugh when he stated that Colin Powell voted for Barack Obama because he was black. What other reason can you think of…Mr. Powell has railed on the Republican Party because it is not moderate enough, and when the most moderate Republican candidate possible gets the nomination, he votes for someone in the Democrat Party.

That said, I do not hold anything against him for doing so. I understand, from an outsider looking in viewpoint, that black America was proud of the fact that a black man was nominated for the highest office in the land, and most voted based on that pride. I do not have a problem with that at all…this time. When they see that, IMO, his policies and the direction he is taking the United States, and they vote for him again, then, in my eyes, they appear to be voting for him simply because he is black, and I really don’t want to say it is racism, rather simply blind.

I’m not so sure you’re right on this one.. it seemed to me that he hung back until the game was all but over, then endorsed the presumed winner. He would have come out for Obama much earlier if race was the reason. Cynical, not racist. Though who knows? I’ve been wrong before.. (rarely, but it does happen)

Whatever his intentions were, i had lost a lot of repsect for him from his decision to be so hypocritical and go against what he felt so strongly for(moderate republican running & experience), that he stated it publicly, then when a black man beats out a white women, he went against his core values and endorsed a black man with no experience at all and no sense of moderation at all in his candidate as he had the highest leftist score ever recorded.
Colin powell can you spell hypocrite and racist!!!

Remember that Powell was disillusioned with the Republican party well before this election cycle. He felt that the Bush administration had lied to him and used him. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking he voted for him simply because he is black. Perhaps he voted for him because he believed he would be better for the country than McCain.

You get my drift. Had they run, would the left have attacked them? They certainly attacked Rice while she was in office. Powell had a lot of respect from all sides, but I think that they would have attacked him if he was a candidate. Both Rice and Powell have more leadership and world experience than Obama but both would have been attacked by the left and the media had they run. There would have been no free pass like Obama got.

Don’t care what any of you say, I dislike this zebra a lot, he has brought more problems to America than I have noticed and I have been on this earth longer than any of you, 85 years and he is the worst president I have ever seen, read about etc. I do not like him, he is an arrogant narcissis meglomanic and some day you people who like him will be able to admit it. To spend money taking his wife out and have a fleet of helicopters fly with them for protection, why does he love abortion, black babies aborted, took the ban on partial birth abortion off, I challenge him to witness a partial birth abortion, oh wait he will have to get an ok from some of his handlers via the teleprompter, maybe soros can tell him not to watch, my anger is so wild at this time, I can’t say how much I hate this person, Jesus says we shouldn’t hate, but when we are wearing head scarves and burkas and have to walk behind a man, then I will say, God bless Obama, please change his Muslim heart into a decent, kind, compassionate heart as a Christian has. Amen. Can you other posts say anything that agrees with me, NO!!!!!!!!!

First off: Zebra? Is that a dig at him being half-black/half-white? Or him being from Africa? Or both.. either way points for creativity and nothing else.

There are a number of problems with your post but lets just hit the high points: He’s not Muslim, he’s Christian. If I interpreted your zebra comment correctly, then you’re also wrong about him being from Kenya, he’s from Hawaii. If I interpreted your zebra comment correctly, then it’s also pretty racist (in the real way, not the left crying wolf way) – what does his race have to do with why you hate him? All Presidents are arrogant. You must be in order to believe that you are capable of such an awesome responsibility as leading the United States of America for four-eight years. But he is more arrogant than bush? Than Bill Clinton? Please. As for abortion, while you may view it as a moral evil, more than half the country agrees with me that it is not, so tell me why you believe that he should follow your lead and not mine in a democracy. But he does not love abortion. That is unfair and untrue. He recognizes that it is a difficult, painful, morally ambiguous choice – but a choice non-the-less. And what’s that about you wearing scarves and burkas? Has he advocated the implementation of sharia law? I must have missed that.

That said, 85 and using the computer.. way to go.. my 85 year old grandmother wouldn’t know what to do with a computer if it bit her on the butt.

I have to retract the portion concerning abortion in general…some polls (PEW research) in particular, show the gap narrowing…withing 2 percentage points, but still favoring abortion in general. Partial birth abortion, I believe would be a differnt…In fact I read that around 62% do not favor it.

I’d be interested though, if you called partial-birth abortion something much less inflammatory, what would the result show? For example, if you called it late-term or some such.

If I ask people if they support the right to kill unborn babies, it’s going to skew the results. Conversely, if I ask people if it’s ok to terminate a late stage fetus, I would get different results. Whosoever controls the language controls the debate.

Tell people there’s a bill to lower their taxes and they’ll support it, call it the Heil-Hitler-America-Sucks-McCain-Feingold-Kick-Puppies Act and you’ll find that support decreases somewhat.

Agreed…the terminology would make someone look like a demon. If they say “I support partial birth abortion”. However, that is what it is…and Obama has done nothing to make anyone believe that he is against it.

That’s not what it is, though. It’s an intact dilation and extraction procedure. Ask people if they support that, they may give you a different answer, or tell you that they do not know what it is.

So you describe it. You say, they take a baby out of the womb, vacuum out the brains, crush it’s skull, and throw away the body. People will support you. If I describe it, I would say, according to the American Medical Association, this procedure has four main elements. First, the cervix is dilated. Second, the fetus is positioned for a footling breech. Third, the fetus is partially pulled out, starting with the feet, as far as the neck. Fourth, the brain and material inside the skull is evacuated, so that a dead but otherwise intact fetus can be delivered via the vagina. More people still might support you, but the gap will be narrower.

See the power of words? It’s gruesome to watch (and I have watched one), or even think about, but you can’t use a statistic based off of biased terminology. I’m not sure where I fall on the debate, myself, but I think we have to be honest with ourselves in order to get to the truth. Loaded terms just muddy the water.

Yeah terminology is how the liberal progressives survive.
I mean who would want to belong to a movement if it was called wrong.
Instead of right and left being used to describe the political spectrum, we used right and wrong. Who wouldnt want to be right.

And the hijacking of the term pro choice. Both sides get to choose if the baby should live or die.both sides are for choice.

It should be pro life vs pro death, those are the choices. you either want the baby to live or you want it dead. we already have the choice in both sides.
Why should they call it pro choice or pro death or pro choice or pro life.

just call it pro life or pro death and vote the way you stand on it and sell it the way it is, why all the nuddying of the water with a positive word like choice to substitute such a grim word as death and what you wish on the little babies without legal represenatives? Too bad one day a baby doesnt come out of the womb and say i want a lawyer, as i feel my right to life is beeing thwarted by undue process, what is my crime to receive the death penalty,pick me up off the table and keep me warm until the court decides if this born-alive procedure violates my rights. Oh wait im a baby , i dont have any money so why would lawyers want to help me..okay just leave me on the table to die like obama the worlds leader had voted for and supported in every way possible.

Matt, careful here. Are you saying what you think, or what you believe?

“But he does not love abortion. That is unfair and untrue. He recognizes that it is a difficult, painful, morally ambiguous choice – but a choice non-the-less.”

Obama has consistently refused to support legislation that would define an infant who survives a late-term induced-labor abortion as a human being with the right to live. He insists that no restriction must ever be placed on the right of a mother to decide to abort her child.

On March 30, 2001, Obama was the only Illinois senator who rose to speak against a bill that would have protected babies who survived late term labor-induced abortion. Obama rose to object that if the bill passed, and a nine-month-old fetus survived a late-term labor-induced abortion was deemed to be a person who had a right to live, then the law would “forbid abortions to take place.” Obama further explained the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not allow somebody to kill a child, so if the law deemed a child who survived a late-term labor-induced abortion had a right to live, “then this would be an anti-abortion statute.”

Loves abortion? No. But there does not seem to be ANY pro-abortion law or procedure he does not actively support. He is as extreme in his abortion position as you can be. Sara Palin was labeled as an extremist on her anti-abortion views, Obama was portrayed as a moderate. Bulldookey!

“He recognizes that it is a difficult, painful, morally ambiguous choice – but a choice non-the-less.”

I am big on parents rights, especially concerning medical procedures, and parental permission and notification. It appears Obama wants to make that choice for me and my wife.

# Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
# Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
# Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)

I agree with all three votes. Though, of course, it would depend on the actual language employed in the bills, I would generally agree. I do not think you should necessarily have the choice to force your daughter to bear an unwanted child to term. I do not consider (early term) fetuses people, and they may be good for medical research. I do not necessarily think anyone, parent or otherwise, has a right to know when a woman (even a minor) chooses to have an abortion.

And yes, Obama is at the left extreme as Palin is to the right. And as always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Why is the truth always found in the middle.
what with all this grey.
Cant sometimes one side be right and the other wrong?
I know how you feel, i had felt that way myself in school, but now i realize that more and more that there is actually less truth found in the middle and that sometimes things boil down to right and wrong and good and evil. The grey just blinds us from the truth for our own reasons.

number of incidents at Planned Parenthood clinics in which personnel have either looked the other way or stated their willingness to look the other way in the face of state laws requiring the reporting of suspected sexual abuse of minors under the age of 16.

In one of those cases, the abuser, now serving a five-year prison sentence, was the victim’s own father, who had forced his daughter to share his bed and have sex with him starting at age 13;

another, involving the same Planned Parenthood branch in Cincinnati, Ohio, also featured

a 13-year-old, this one impregnated by her school soccer coach who accompanied her to the clinic and paid for the abortion with his credit card, while she showed the staff her junior high school ID card.

Yes. And we should be making it more difficult for these poor children to have abortions?

That poor child should have to ask her father for permission to abort a fetus which is biologically his? What if he said no? She should have to have it? And she should be stuck with this living reminder that her father raped her for the rest of her life?

For the other girl, she should have to have her parents notified that she slept with her coach? Sounds great in principle (I would sure want to know if it were my daughter), but then she might not go to a clinic – she’d go to a back alley and get it done. I’d rather not know than risk having my daughter end up sterile or dead because she was too embarrassed to tell me.

Abortions are like sex. People are going to have them. Whether you want them to or not, whether it’s legal or not, whether it’s safe or not, they will. So the only thing your laws would do is make it more dangerous for them.

“but then she might not go to a clinic – she’d go to a back alley and get it done.”

The point here is you/Obama want to deny me the right to raise my child by allowing a medical procedure without my permission or even notification.
Because of what you fear MIGHT happen otherwise. I think you are wrong about that as well. As long as abortion is legal, there will be too little demand to support an illegal market.

You, sir, are obviously too far removed from your teenage years. Don’t underestimate the extent to which teens will go to hide things from their parents.

Teens will get them in back alleys in both instances described above. The father, not wanting to risk arrest, would have it done that way. The coach for the same reasons. Also, girls who don’t want their parents to know. Or they’ll use coat hangers like they used to. That is the path you would set them down.

Ok, here’s the thing, and I’ve said this before, government has absolutely NO business telling me, or any woman, what I can and cannot do with my body. This is something that should never have been legislated. This should be left to the woman and her concience. If she can live with it it doesn’t matter whether or not anyone else can.

Now you are finding fault for when he took a stance, as opposed to his massive amount of voting “present”.

Careful on the embryonic stem cell research vote. That subject has nothing to do with abortion and should be evaluated on its merits as opposed to its incendiary name. Remember, how it is worded changes opinion. It certainly has done so in the case of embryonic stem cell research.

Canadian scientists have proven using adult stem cells the better method both the sustainable viability of the material itself while easily making the social acceptance a moot point. That they did this with a “pocket change” budget while others working with embryonic in the EU have burned though a fortune should punctuate the matter for all concerned.

There’s a better way of getting it done through drastically increasing the number of vectors actual trials may simultaneously take with an almost overabundance of blank stem cells to use but its not politically charged enough for America to accept? If you want to talk science, take the blinders off first and foremost.

As has been described to you before, it would not matter if 100% of the people BELIEVED that abortion was ok. It can be factually and logically proven to be immoral.

You can disagree with the fact that abortion is immoral, but your agreement or disagreement makes no inherent difference.

Of course we have been through that all before and you were not convinced, so there is no reason to re-hash it again. You are a moral relativist and do not believe in absolutes, so there is no convincing you.

I wish I was a moral relativist, because, if I was, I could find endless justification for killing people just because killing them was more convenient for me than letting them live. I could say things like, “the woman does not want that baby, so what kind of life would the baby have if we let it live?”

Of course, if we kill it, there is no way to actually ANSWER that hypothetical question, so the qestion actually makes no sense.

I could also say things like, “That old man who is paralyzed from the neck down and suffering from severe Alzheimers and dementia is clearly just suffering a worthless end to his life, it would be better to just put him out of his misery.”

It must be really nice to be a moral relativist and be able to justify these sorts of statements. Many days I wish I could do just that.

Let’s take this for a fun test-case, shall we?

If you had a pregnant horse, induced the horse into labor right before the normal term of delivery, and before the foal was fully outside of the mother horse’s body, you crushed the foal’s skull and sucked out its brain.

Would PETA be all over you and would you be arrested and thrown in jail for cruelty to animals? You bet.

Hypocritically though, it is perfectly ok to do this to humans, provided the mother-human says she is ok with it.

Anyway, back to my main point. If you are a moral relativist, then the fact that ~50% of all people happen to agree with your position can be used to justify your position. This is the “the majority is always right (unless I don’t agree with them)” rule.

It can be used for all sorts of things. If a majority HAPPENS to support your position, then you can argue that your postition is valid. If the majority HAPPENS to DISAGREE with your position, you can always fall back on, “Well, the masses are ignorant and don’t know what they are talking about.”

In reality, it is either one or the other, you cannot have it both ways.

If you (like me) are NOT a moral relativist, then you can reason out whether something is moral or not, and can recognize when the majority is holding an immoral position. You may not be able to CHANGE THE OPINION of the majority, but you can at least recognize that they are holding an immoral position.

There are some situations which do not have a good, moral solution. This, however, is not the same as moral relativism. It is merely the recognition that in certain situations, no matter what course of action you take, there may be no “good way out”.

Anyway, enough about that for today, we have been through that can of worms before, and I know that neither one of us is going to be convinced of the other’s position, but I felt the need to throw that out there anyway.

She comes down from Yellow Mountain
On a dark, flat land she rides
On a pony she named Wildfire
With a whirlwind by her side
On a cold Nebraska night

Oh, they say she died one winter
When there came a killing frost
And the pony she named Wildfire
Busted down its stall
In a blizzard he was lost

She ran calling Wildfire [x3]
By the dark of the moon I planted
But there came an early snow
There’s been a hoot-owl howling by my window now
For six nights in a row
She’s coming for me, I know
And on Wildfire we’re both gonna go

Zebra is actually considered a racial slur. Not saying Goldie is a racist – only she knows that for sure.

And yes USW – in your intro regarding my family member is spot on. He was actually roughed up a bit in the confrontation.

It reminds me also of John Street – he was mayor in Philly after Rendell – he was caught on camera essentially saying the same nonsense – that after eight years of a white guy in office the colored folks were now in charge. I believe the remarks were made at an NAACP dinner in Philly – most all in the crowd hooped and hollered at the remarks.

Just curious, since he is a Christian, and apparently spent 20 years listening to Rev Wright on a regular basis, seems like he would have picked a church ASAP in DC…I remember other presidents being occasionally filmed attending church over the years.

Seems since he was accused of being Muslim, he would have made SURE he was getting that photo op of him and his family going to church.

Can you imagine the outcry if Obama attended a mosque? He hasn’t grabbed enough power yet to be able to get away openly practising Islam. What’s to say he isn’t doing it behind closed doors? He could easily get away with it. But, like LOI said, there’s no way of knowing what’s in BHO’s heart.

I see his going to church as a personal issue. I hadn’t thought of the fact that we don’t hear of him going to church because I didn’t really care. For the record, I think I remember hearing something about about him choosing a church, but it didn’t register as important to me.

The “Zebra” crap I have no tolerance for. Many of my earliest friends to you would fit that garbage description. Here’s the undeniable truth. There are exactly two kinds of people on this globe and neither has anything to do with the melanin content of their skin.

Those who are at least aware of the affect they and their actions have or will have upon others.

Those who are almost solely aware of their actions affect upon themselves and the effect of others actions upon them.

One lives outward the other inward and all the world’s woes and wonder stem from such. Both have the potential to be either saints or monsters. Its not racial as their is actually only 1 race.

As I recall, Goldie was born around 1924 or so. That isn’t to try to justify the use of the term Zebra to describe Obama. I merely point it out in order to say that when Goldie was growing up, Zebra would probably be very “tame” compared with the terms that were in use (and generally considered acceptable by many people) back at that time.

We all are a product of our upbringing. The fact that Zebra is no longer considered a “tame” term but is considered “unacceptable” just shows how much has changed in the last 85 years.

Once again, I am not trying to justify the use of the term, merely to try to put it into context.

Peter et al – help me understand something here less I think you’re hypocritical and full of shit ~

So Goldie passes on a remark (“zebra”) in reference to POTUS. Peter states that before we rush to judgment and say bad and mean things of Goldie we should understand her age, the times she grew up in, context, etc – the use of the word zebra was okay at some point – it was a sign or aspect of the times. The times of changed but that doesn’t mean all the Goldies of the world have stayed abreast in the latest developments on racial slurs and epithets. Well okay – as I said, only Goldie knows if she is racist or not – maybe we shouldn’t allow her mere words to judge her overall.

BUT WAIT A SECOND!

Let’s flip the dial to Professor Gates shall we? Any chance we have a guy that grew up at the other of the stick Goldie and others may have been on? Perhaps raised in a time and age where msot white cops they ran into maybe didn’t have the best of intentions when it came to dealing with black folk? Maybe those perceptions were equally ingrained into his “DNA” such that its a permanent part of the lens that he see the world – even as his academic mind tries to wrap itself around that conflict (what is today, what is yesterday, is there a difference?). My consternation is the speed to which a pass is given to someone like Goldie (she has more wisdom than the rest of us, she grew up in different times) whereas Gates is immediately thrown under the train because he has similar, potentially misguided thoughts.

I do not. I am merely putting the use of the term in context, and trying to explain why the person using it probably thought that it wasn’t a big deal.

I know that you are not nuanced enough to discern context from implied approval, but there is indeed a difference.

So, to put it bluntly for you, Goldie used a term which none of us approve of, because it is a racial slur, and I was attempting to put the usage of the term in context. I suppose I should have made it even more clear that regardless of the circumstances, I do not approve of the use of the term.

But Peter – context cannot matter some of the time rather than all the time – that is how a relativist thinks. I know the difference between placing something in context and tacit approval. But – the manner in which you ‘place the comments in context’ is akin to me saying that Martin Luther’s writings on Jews should not be taken out of context because one must consider context. Its also like saying that the Founders that owned slaves were not wrong in that they also declared ‘all men are equal’ (since their slaves were defined as property and therefore could not be considered ‘man’) – no – they were actually wrong. So I ask you – place Henry Gates in context – go ahead – try it. Not asking you to approve of anything he said. I’m merely asking you to not talk from both sides of your mouth.

MAYBE I AM A RACIST, NOT SURE, THOUGH I WATCH BLACK PREACHERS CONTINUALLY, I LIKE THEM I RESPECT THEM, AND WANT TO TELL YOU I GOT PREG.AT 25, NOT MARRIED, HAD MY CHILD, A SON AND HE IS NOW 58 WORKS FOR u.s. FOREST SERVICE, SAVES HOMES AND LIVES, I WILL SAY A BAD THING AGAIN, I BLAME THE MOTHERS FOR KILLING THEIR CHILDREN, NOBODY COULD TOUCH MY CHILD, I TRY NOT TO CRITIZE ANYBODY, IF I DO UNFAIRLY, THEN MY LORE AND SAVIOR WILL JUDGE ME HARSHLY, BUT IN ALL MY YEARS, I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE DESTRUCTION THIS PERSON HAS BROUGHT UNTO THE AMERICA I HAVE BEEN A CITIZEN OF FOR 85 YEARS, A VETERAN OF U.S. MARINE CORPS. DURING WW2, NOW OLD, DISABLED, BUT I HATE SURPRISES, AND WHEN MY SON FOUND OUT I WAS BLOGGING HE SAID HOW PROUD OF ME HE WAS, OH, HE IS ALSO A STEPFATHER OF 3 DAUGHTERS, MARRIED 18 YEARS, AND AS I SAID ABOVE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED. MAYBE THIS WILL EXPLAIN HOW UPSET I AM WHEN IN TOOK THE BAN ON PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION OFF THAT BUSH HAD PUT ON THIS OPERATION. GOD BLESS ALL OF YOU, TERRY TELL YOUR PARENT SEMPER FI FOR ME

Didn’t President Obama get the largest percentage ofthe black vote in US history? With many of them saying that they voted for him BECAUSE he was black? A far larger percentage of that group, and IIRC far larger in actual numbers, than whites who said that they DIDN’t vote for President Obama because he as black

Emilius, who teaches at a predominantly minority school, reports that all the kids (and their parents) are going nuts over the Nobel, but that nobody has as yet been able to give a single reason for the win. This may be more about racial pride than racism, though it walk a fine line.

That said, the number of whites who said they didn’t vote for Obama because he was black is less than the number of white who didn’t vote for him because he is black. Most people, no matter how racist, know that the correct answer to that question is “no.” So the people who answered yes were, in fact, racist, but there had to be others (and just how many?) who felt the same way but didn’t own up to it.

But voting for a member of your race rather than against a member of another race are different things. The blacks who voted for him because he is black are idiots. The blacks who voted for him because McCain was white and they don’t want a cracker as President are racists. See the distinction? Subtle, perhaps, but I think it makes a difference.

Also, do you happen to have on hand the statistics on the percentage of white voters who voted for McCain because Obama is black?

Any action (or inaction) that you take BECAUSE of the race, gender, religion, ar sexual orientation of a given individual is prejudiced, either for or against that individual. The people who voted FOR the president just because of the color of his skin are just as racist as the one who voted against him for that reason. It goes completely against that world that Dr. King envisioned where men “will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”.

My initial reaction to Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize was that this was Obamamania gone wild. That’s part of it.

But I think there is more to it. The internationalists have tied Obama’s hands. Will Obama continue ordering drones to bomb houses in Pakistan? Will he listen to the military as to how to win in Afghanistan? Is there any choice but to consent to an Iranian nuclear weapon?

Will the Peace Prize winner take all military options off the table?

This Peace Prize was given to Obama in order manipulate our policies and national security decisions. And I think it will work.

I would be interested to see what the statistics would be if Walter E. Williams were to run for President as a Republican.

I am fairly certain that a large number of blacks would NOT vote for him simply because he was black. As a matter of fact, many Democrats would probably argue that he, in fact, was NOT black based upon the fact that he is a conservative, therefore he would be characterized as an “Uncle Tom” or something of the sort, in a concerted effort to get black voters to specifically NOT vote for him.

This, of course would provide an interesting study in racism in and of itself. Black people routinely will be instructed to NOT support various black politicians (especially if they are conservatives) because they have “sold out” or “are not black enough”.

I have a co-worker who is a black woman with lightly colored skin. We have worked on race issues together within our company and she has provided a lot of interesting insight for me, into the black community.

She has felt the most racism in her growing up years from within the black community, due to her light color. Her sister, who is much darker, had no such problems.

During the campaign, she pointed out that BO was never called bi-racial, because he would never get the overwhelming support that he did from the black community. In fact, even though he had a white mother, he is quite dark skinned and she claims, if he was light colored like her, he would not even have made it past the primaries.

She is a conservative with a lot of military background and was not supportive then, or now of BO. She said, though, she would never share this with any of her black friends.

We’ve been able to talk about a lot of issues very openly and I truly appreciate her as a friend and co-worker. I do feel bad that she still cannot openly be herself within her own black community.

Yes it is. The pendulum must swing the other way. If you want me to take you serious then stop clouding the situation. I/we cant fix racism if its around every corner behind every bush. Once they “the ones who are flinging it” realize it is doing more harm than good they will stop. I am talking about real people not politicos.

Mathius, I agree that there are actual racists that come in all skin colors and from all religious affiliations. I also agree that there is what you call “injustice” based on race.

However, the left now has “The Boy who Cried Wolf” syndrome. They cry “RASCISM!” so often, that most people now tune them out when they make the claim, regardless of whether the claim has merit or not.

All politicians have branded themselves as liars (regardless of what side of the aisle they are on), and so the first reaction of most sane people is to automatically assume that whatever just came out of a politician’s mouth is a lie.

Combine an overwhelming propensity for lying with an overwhelming propensity for crying “RACISM!” whether it is justified or not, and you get what we have now.

And it shouldn’t JUST be the left shutting up about it… the right should too.

Where real examples of racism exist, they should be pointed out and condemned. Where racism is used in an inappropriate context in order to demean someone and “win” and argument illegitimately, ANYONE guilty of that tactic should be publicly ridiculed by all.

That is correct, Mathius, I agree with you here. I hear the term racist now and I simply scoff….hell, I am a racist here because I insist that the immigration laws be enforced. So be it…I am racist. If you violate the law you are to be punished for it. Green, White, Black , Yellow, red, Blue, Purple….does not matter.

I don’t think you can eliminate someone from calling someone else racist for political gain. It is like in the old days when you called someone a communist and their career was over. Except race won’t go away like the USSR did.

Sick and tired of this as well. Little boy who cried wolf. Their was a radio show here in Houston some weeks ago on the sickest racial Obama moment. The winner by landslide. A lady at a dentist office saw a whole family of 4 clad in “Obama the first black president” shirts. Obama is the man shorts. Obama the dream has come true socks and finally if that wasnt enough Obama’s face on their shoes. If I saw a family of 4 all wearing that I would leave before I threw up. I had a thought this morning when I heard he won the “no tell(ing) prize”. I want to get a bunch of shirts printed up with “George Washington – our first WHITE president”. I wonder how much news coverage I could get with that one. Its kind of a dare to see if they would even let me speak on camera or how ‘cropped’ the response would be.

Just to be clear I am not normally a racist. When you throw the color of your skin in my face I become very racist and want to take you back to your country of origin so you dont have to deal with the racism anymore. To all who think I am. If you dont like it go somewhere you wont have to deal with it. I am sure the plains of Africa is free from racism. However the lions dont care if its white or dark meat they are just hungry. I am sure Olberman could make the case that lions are racist though if they ate a black skinned person.

Cavemen were profilers. Its all their fault they started it. Those things eat me and I eat those things. So they were profiling those things that could do them harm. I mean look at the number of senseless violence shown on TV lately. Clearly people of color are pacifists. They dont beat children to death, they dont break into houses, they dont car jack anyone, they dont do drive-by’s, there is no gang called the bloods and the crips, nope we have no reason to think that “those guys” might do something to us. 12% of the population commiting 50% of the crimes in America. Seems like the problem is not me thinking they might do something wrong. They want to clean this up. Stop all the above.

Watched O’Reilly last night, he had a segment on illegal coverage in the health care bill. According to his legal guests, it would be illegal to exclude any aliens from the same health care as citizens. It does not matter if the bill prohibits them coverage, that part of it would be found un-constitutional and struck, for the same reason illegals are allowed free education. Sorry I could not link to the report yet, will try to find later. Other info…

Obama said they are wrong in claiming illegal immigrants will be covered: “That is not true. Illegal immigrants would not be covered. That idea has not even been on the table.” Obama said.

Well, Mr. President, that idea must have been tucked under a stack of background briefing papers over there in the corner of the table because the Congressional Research Service (CRS) says this about H.R. 3200, the Obamacare bill approved just before the recess by the House Energy and Commerce Committee chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA:
“Under H.R. 3200, a ‘Health Insurance Exchange’ would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.”

CRS also notes that the bill has no provision for requiring those seeking coverage or services to provided proof of citizenship. So, absent some major amendments to the legislation and a credible, concrete enforcement effort in action, looks like the myth on this issue is the one being spread by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et. al.

My understanding is that if they pass a national health care law, it will cover the illegals no matter what the bill says. So if Obama, Pelosi and Reed put specific language in there prohibiting them coverage, its all just smoke and mirrors. They will still get the same treatment as all citizens.

I am sick to death about everything anybody says anymore is racist. I am not a racist person, never have been, never will be. I don’t care what color a person is, heck they can be green with blue stripes for all I care. Color does not make a person, it’s what’s inside that makes a person who they are. If you don’t agree with Obama, you’re a racist, you want Charlie Wrangle out, you’re a racist, don’t like what they said, you’re a racist. I think it’s time to put the racist card away.

But, this morning I read in the paper about a new black Barbie, okay fine, I thought no big deal to me. But, nooooooooo, now they are complaining because the hair isn’t right, not kinky enough, it’s too long and straight. So what, they made them with bigger lips, a more flattened nose, what’s wrong with the longer straight hair. Half of them straighten their hair anyway, so what’s the big deal.

Racism has always been around and always will, it will never go away. But, I am damn tired of being called a racist. If I were, would I have welcomed my cousin’s husband who happens to be black with open arms? NO. I have another cousin who was married twice to gals who are of different ethnic backgrounds, so what, that’s not what makes them who they are, it’s what’s inside. It’ seems to be getting worse by the day, and I’m just sick of it, time to put it to bed. Yea, Iknow, in my dreams, right.

I think that the racism charge is being used so often that it is losing all credibility and effectiveness. I am a proud conservative. I would laugh if some idiot called me a racist. I know that my core values of individual liberty and responsibility are equally good for all Americans, regardless of their race. So, to all you idiots out there, keep crying racism when you have no valid arguments. When real racism crops up and nobody takes it seriously, you can blame yourself.

I agree that the charges of racism have become to common, and it cheapens the debate. But anyone who dismisses racism as a thing of the past is guilty of the same thing at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Do I think that all/most opposition to Obama is racism. Absolutely not.
Do I think that there are some people who use that opposition to stir the pot and promote their racists views. Yes, I do.

In the last 50-60 years, both sides have learned how to use racism to their advantage:

The ‘far left’ has learned that when it cries racism, and it gets sympathy, legislation, etc. This is very easy to spot, because the idea is to make noise and get attention. Which is why your Google searches find so many examples.

The ‘far right’ has learned that outright racism no longer works, so it migrated to little comments and stunts that hint at racism, or could be interpreted as racism, or could lead to racism. But it’s not outright racism. This is very hard to spot, because the idea is to avoid making noise and avoid attention, while still delivering the message. Which is why your Google searches find so few examples.

USWeapon,
As I read further into your article, what started out fairly balance, seemed to slide farther and farther to the right. And you seem to come to the conclusion that the only racism in America is the racism created by Liberals…

Because they are CREATING racial tension, racial hatred, and bigotry in America in a generation of Americans who were not raised with that being the reality.

I interpret they as Liberals based on previous content.

So long as those on the left continue to believe that those on the right are racist scum, they will never come together to find out the truth.

I think this stands on it’s own…

The claims of racism for political gain where racism isn’t the actual issue are the lowest form of slander in today’s America.

I agree, but you’ve provided no evidence that racism doesn’t exist…until later when you say it is still there…

Those on the left have to begin holding the liberal media, Democratic politicians, and liberal celebrities accountable. Boycott, reprimand, refuse to vote for, do whatever you can to show them that this tactic is no longer acceptable. Those on the right have to do the same when Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck make claims like they do.

Maybe I’m being over sensitive, and maybe you were getting a little worked up as you wrote this, but you seem to be harsher on the left than right.

Left – hold media, politicians, celebrities accountable
Right – do the same when Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck make claims

So the left is always wrong?
Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck are only wrong sometimes (when)?
Are other right-wing media ever wrong?
Are politicians and celebrities on the right ever wrong?

Racism is real. It isn’t a game. It may not be nearly as bad as it was 40 years ago, but it is still there. And its use as a political tool has to stop.

You do end more in the middle, and I agree – as long as it applies to both sides.

In general, I’d say that racism (from all directions) is on the decline, but it’s being replaced by a general hatred between opposing sides. The idea is that “I don’t hate the person, I just hate his ideas”. But I’m not sure that is any different. Just a different way to express the hatred in an ‘acceptable’ way. In the end, it still leads to the same thing.

As I read further into your article, what started out fairly balance, seemed to slide farther and farther to the right. And you seem to come to the conclusion that the only racism in America is the racism created by Liberals…

I gave what I could find on conservatives discussing race in the recent past. I shared my search parameters and results. I didn’t come to the conclusion that liberals are the only ones using race. I came to conclusion that they are throwing around that word about 100 times as much as conservatives these days. If you dispute that being so, then show me where I am wrong, rather than getting upset that I point out the reality.

I interpret they as Liberals based on previous content.

I on several occasions pointed out examples on both sides. I stated me case. Refute it. I am all for being fair. But that doesn’t mean that I am going to make up statements from the right or pretend that the examples I found weren’t 100 to 1 from the left in order to make sure no one was offended.

So long as those on the left continue to believe that those on the right are racist scum, they will never come together to find out the truth.

I think this stands on it’s own…

It does. With the vast majority of the racist claims going from left to right, those who read only left stuff feel that those on the right are racist scum and therefore won’t bother trying to discuss something with them.

The claims of racism for political gain where racism isn’t the actual issue are the lowest form of slander in today’s America.

I agree, but you’ve provided no evidence that racism doesn’t exist…until later when you say it is still there…

You completely misread this. I have never, ever claimed that racism doesn’t exist. My sentence that you copied to here says that it is bad to claim racism when the reason for opposition is not racism. I specifically said claims of racism for political gain where racism is not the actual issue. Where in there do I say racism doesn’t exist?

Maybe I’m being over sensitive, and maybe you were getting a little worked up as you wrote this, but you seem to be harsher on the left than right.

Left – hold media, politicians, celebrities accountable
Right – do the same when Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck make claims

So the left is always wrong?
Hannity, Limbaugh, and Beck are only wrong sometimes (when)?
Are other right-wing media ever wrong?
Are politicians and celebrities on the right ever wrong?

You are being a bit oversensitive here. Left hold your side accountable and right hold your side accountable. I thought it was pretty even-handed. Again, should I make some stuff up about the right to balance the equations? Can you name for me a celebrity that leans right and has ever made a claim that the left are racists? I cannot think of a single one. So why would I tell the right to stop those doing it? Its like telling the left to hold their side accountable for all the times their pets take the mic and sing a bad song. It doesn’t happen so why would I say it? But to answer your 4 questions:

No, No, Yes, Yes/No (politicians yes/celebrities I have never heard of one mentioning racism from the right)

Barack Obama today sensationally won the Nobel Peace Prize after just nine months in office for returning America to a multilateralist foreign policy after eight years of going it alone under George W Bush

The recently released UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission on the December-January Gaza conflict, released on the eve of Barack Obama’s attempt to jump-start comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, was but the latest in a series of investigations, most of them by human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Like its predecessors, the so-called Goldstone report, named after chief investigator Richard Goldstone, is devastating in its critique of Israeli actions: indiscriminate use of firepower; deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian structures, including hospitals, schools, mosques, water and sewage plants, and rescue vehicles; use of white phosphorus munitions in built-up areas; use of human shields; abusive treatment of detainees; imposition of a blockade on Gaza before and after the attack itself–the report concludes that Israel violated international humanitarian law, committed “grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in respect of wilful killings and wilfully causing great suffering to protected persons,” and war crimes, possibly even crimes against humanity. The courageous Israeli journalist Gideon Levy summed it up well in Haaretz: it was “an unrestrained assault on a besieged, totally unprotected civilian population which showed almost no signs of resistance during this operation.”

Perhaps most damning of all was the testimony of some thirty Israeli veterans of the operation gathered by the organization Breaking the Silence, published in a booklet in July and cited by the Goldstone report. According to the booklet’s introduction, “The majority of the soldiers who spoke with us are still serving in their regular military units and turned to us in deep distress at the moral deterioration of the IDF.… The stories of this publication prove that we are not dealing with the failures of individual soldiers, and attest instead to failures in the application of values primarily on a systemic level.” The testimony is chilling: “Fire power was insane”; “if you see any signs of movement at all, you shoot. These, essentially, were the rules of engagement. Shoot if you like”; “Houses were demolished everywhere.… We didn’t see a single house that was not hit”; “whole neighborhoods were simply razed because four houses in the area served to launch Qassam rockets”; “You know what? You feel like a child playing around with a magnifying glass, burning up ants. Really. A 20-year-old kid should not be doing such things to people.”

Predictably, the Goldstone report was met by a wave of angry denunciations from the Israeli government — which had refused to cooperate with the investigators — and most of the Israeli media. The mainstream media here have downplayed the investigation’s significance; news coverage has been sparse, and not one major U.S. daily has seen fit to editorialize on it (unless you count a nasty little screed from the New York Daily News calling the report a “blood libel against Israel”). And U.S. pundits and politicians — including UN ambassador Susan Rice, who called it “unbalanced, one-sided and basically unacceptable” — have been overwhelmingly critical.

But it’s not so easy to dismiss these findings. For one thing, the nearly 600-page report is carefully documented and comprehensive, and is based on field visits, public hearings, almost 200 individual interviews, photos, videos, satellite imagery and a review of more than 300 other reports. For another, its head, Goldstone, is one of the most respected and experienced international jurists, having served as a justice on South Africa’s Constitutional Court and chief UN prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

And then there are Goldstone’s personal connections: he’s Jewish and, according to his daughter, herself an ardent Zionist who lived in Israel for six months, he’s “a Zionist and loves Israel.” Indeed, she said of her father, who serves on the Board of Governors of Hebrew University, “I know that if he thought what he did would not somehow be for the sake of peace for everyone in Israel or that it would have hindered such efforts, he would not have accepted the job.”

Before taking it on, Goldstone insisted on expanding the mission’s mandate so that it cover Palestinian acts; far from being one-sided, the report concluded that Hamas rocket and mortar barrages on southern Israel were “indiscriminate attacks upon the civilian population,” acts that “would constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity.” International law expert (and Nation editorial board member) Richard Falk has concluded that “no credible international commission could reach any set of conclusions other than those reached by the Goldstone Report on the central allegations.”

Falk points out that there are good reasons for Israel’s panicked reaction. In addition to the report’s balance and the credibility of its chief, Goldstone recommends that Israel and Hamas carry out serious, comprehensive investigations of their own into the alleged crimes, and that if they do not do so within six months, the UN Security Council should consider referring the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. That’s highly unlikely, given US veto power in the Security Council. But the report will further diminish Israel’s reputation and will probably strengthen the growing international boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. In his column on the report, Gideon Levy darkly concludes, “On the eve of the Jewish New Year, Israel, deservedly, is becoming an outcast and detested country. We must not forget it for a minute.”

A July 2001 poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy & Survey Research (PSR) found that 58 percent of Palestinians supported armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel and 92 percent supported armed confrontations against the Israeli army in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.[42]

A May 2002 poll by the center found that support for bombings of civilians inside Israel dropped to 52 percent, (what a peace loving people!)

but support for armed attacks against Israeli settlers remained “very high” at 89 percent. Support for armed attacks against soldiers stood at 92 percent.[43]

A 2003 poll by the center conducted after the 2003 Maxim restaurant suicide bombing, in which 20 Israelis were killed, found that 75 percent of Palestinians supported the attack, with support higher, (why can’t we be friends, why can’t we be friends, why can’t we be friends? Oh yhea, because three quarters of you think killing civilians in a restaurant is a good thing)

“in the Gaza Strip (82%) compared to the West Bank (70%), in refugee camps (84%) compared to towns and villages (69%), among women (79%) compared to men (71%), among the young (78%) compared to the old (66%), among students (81%) compared to professionals (33%), and among supporters of Hamas (92%) compared to supporters of Fateh (69%).”[44]

The firing of rockets from Beit Hanoun into Israel was acceptable to about three quarters of the Palestinian public in the occupied territories, and is higher, “in the West Bank (78%) compared to the Gaza Strip (71%), among students (83%) compared to merchants (63%), and among supporters of Hamas (86%) compared to supporters of Fateh (73%).

It is interesting to note that while firing rockets from Beit Hanoun receives support from a majority of the Palestinians (75%),( so 75% of the peace loving Palestinians favor firing rockets supplied by Iran at Israel)

59% of the residents of Beit Hanoun reject this intifada practice.”
(41% of the people living in the area’s the used to launch rockets thought this was a great ideal, note to self, if my neighbor starts shooting rockets from his house, I need to get him to stop or move)
“It was also noted that 83% of Palestinians wanted a mutual cessation of violence.” ( As I stated before, and you agreed, Arafat really screwed them over when he walked out on Camp David.)

Are we humans not funny? We all contradict ourselves on multiple issues( we can exclude you, oh might Flag, but then, you might not be human, mutant or alien gene?). Its interesting that this study shows 83% of the Palestinians want a cessation of violence, but 52% support bombing civilian targets.

I will not claim Israel is innocent of wrongdoing.
I think there will be no peace until a majority of Palestinians renounce violence.
It would also help if Israel would stop building settlements in contested area’s.

But he’s into whips, the chicks will dig him. OK, I had to look it up.

Balrogs are described as tall, menacing humanoid beings, with the ability to shroud themselves in fire, darkness, and shadow. They frequently appeared armed with fiery whips of many thongs, and occasionally used long swords. In Tolkien’s later conception, they could not be casually destroyed; significant power was required. Only dragons rivalled their capacity for ferocity and destruction,[1] and during the First Age of Middle-earth, they were among the most feared of Morgoth’s forces.

My bad, Black Flag is not as tall as the typical balrog, but typical is not a word normally used to describe him either.
Shrouding himself with fire, shadows and darkness, he strikes fear into the hearts of any who utter words such as,
“the government ought to”, or “there ought to be a law”.

You have obviously looked into the history of Israel and Palestine. I know that there have been agreements through out the years for cease fires, so to speak-which side has broken those agreements, both, just one, how many times for each. Whichever question is appropriate.

Only have a few minutes today and I still have to get back to USW from yesterday but I have been pesting so-called liberal (so-called because Obama couldn’t be further from liberal–be nice) democrats all day over the absurd Nobel Peace Prize award. I mean, can it get more diluted than that?

The end justifies the means for the liberal agenda. If they can silence you by calling you a racist then they have achieved their goal, which is to get you to shut up. It is an effective tool if you let it get to you and you shut up. Laugh it off but don’t stop talking about being against health care reform, welfare reform or any other government program that you oppose. We are against big government and stand for liberty, freedom and individual rights. We have nothing to be ashamed of since there is nothing in our VDLG program based upon race. Don’t take the bait.

Regarding our President, I have some concerns about his views toward the color of one’s skin. He sat in Wright’s church for 20 years where they preached black liberation theology. Some of that BS had to sink in. He believes in identity politics, hence his Supreme Court nomination. I think Obama is an angry person, does a good job at hiding it since he only speaks from a teleprompter, but does not share or believe in traditional American values. Why did he immediately take Professor Gates side when he didn’t know all the facts and then have a beer summit to cool things down. He isn’t helping racial matters. I understand why Glenn Beck called him a racist but Beck shouldn’t have used that charge. It bothers me that our President mocked the tea parties and never tried to calm some of the racial charges put forth by MSNBC and other MSM channels.

As long as the charge of racism works, and the media champions it, the liberals will continue to do it. I don’t watch NBC, CBS, ABC or read any of the old liberal media sources. I hope they go out of business.

Racism exists, just not in the form that has been accused lately. The MSM, all the politicians and anyone else that accuses those who Oppose Obama’s policies as being racists, are in my opinion flaming idiots who don’t know what racism really means.

The Nobel Peace Prize, in a span of just a few years has proven to be as insignificant as the who ever is the professional wrestling champ. Means nothing in our society and hasn’t for quite some time.

After the discussion on racism, I think it’s fair to say that ACORN did not engage in racism when helping the pimp and prostitute bring in teenage sex slaves from Central America.

Sorry Charlie (couldn’t resist), I used to be an avid fan of pro wrestling, especially as a youngster. It does make big money, and is a purely entertainment business. And yes, them guys are atheletes. My point was that it’s more like a soap opera than a real sport.

Nobel Prizes- Carter (worst Prez in my lifetime)
Gore- Won promoting a fairlytale that has been proven as such. Obama- Ain’t done shit yet, probably won’t. This is totally political, not about PEACE!

Since it is Friday, I would like to put up a song in tribute. As the maonths have come and gone, I have watched many, including myself, engage in debate with Black Flag. If there is one thing that stays true, it is his morals and his steadfastness to what he believes. That, in our time, is somewhat rare.

With that said, I offer a tribute to Flags consistancy, and a reason why I enjoy the debates that he engages in. Mr. Flag, this should be your theme song!

Sometimes I feel the need for a break from all the issues. I was probably never more impressed with everyone on this site as I was yesterday. The subject of welfare being discussed, and no mention of any particular race. I thought that this was remarkable, considering we all live so far apart, and in so many different environments. I also really like music, so I like to attach songs to events and/or people. It seems a fitting way to show respect and provide for some musical entertainment, even for a few minutes, to help clear the mind. I have another story and song I will post shortly, I think you will like it as well, although it is alittle sad.

In the short amount of time I have been coming here, I would like to say, that I too have done a few rounds with Black Flag, and some of the others as well, and I have to agree with you G about your tribute to him.

He never wavers in his core values and his strong beliefs, and I have come to learn a lot from him, and also have the greatest respect for him as well.

So, I would like to raise my glass to him, and say thank you, don’t ever change your ways and always keep believing the way you do. I have become a student of your ways, and I will always keep learning from you, for you are a great teacher to me.

Always enjoyed reading BF’s stories, waiting for more. Haven’t read any of Charlies yet, would like too, but never seem to find the time to get to the book store. Perhaps this weekend I will go to B & N and look for it.

Yes. And we should be making it more difficult for these poor children to have abortions?

That poor child should have to ask her father for permission to abort a fetus which is biologically his? What if he said no? She should have to have it? And she should be stuck with this living reminder that her father raped her for the rest of her life?

For the other girl, she should have to have her parents notified that she slept with her coach? Sounds great in principle (I would sure want to know if it were my daughter), but then she might not go to a clinic – she’d go to a back alley and get it done. I’d rather not know than risk having my daughter end up sterile or dead because she was too embarrassed to tell me.

Abortions are like sex. People are going to have them. Whether you want them to or not, whether it’s legal or not, whether it’s safe or not, they will. So the only thing your laws would do is make it more dangerous for them.

Yes, I have thought my positions through.
Reply

*
Life of Illusion said
October 9, 2009 at 3:43 pm

“but then she might not go to a clinic – she’d go to a back alley and get it done.”

The point here is you/Obama want to deny me the right to raise my child by allowing a medical procedure without my permission or even notification.
Because of what you fear MIGHT happen otherwise. I think you are wrong about that as well. As long as abortion is legal, there will be too little demand to support an illegal market.

Most kids would tell their parents vs a back alley abortion.
Reply
o
Mathius said
October 9, 2009 at 4:53 pm

You, sir, are obviously too far removed from your teenage years. Don’t underestimate the extent to which teens will go to hide things from their parents.

Teens will get them in back alleys in both instances described above. The father, not wanting to risk arrest, would have it done that way. The coach for the same reasons. Also, girls who don’t want their parents to know. Or they’ll use coat hangers like they used to. That is the path you would set them down.

(What gives you the right to decide what is best for my child? If you pass a law allowing abortion without permission or notification, you have put nameless people like ACORN in place of the child’s parent. If you worry about the coat hangers and back alleys, is there not reason to see if that occurs before passing a law to prevent something that has not happened?

And also, look at the consequence of you law. All the incestuous fathers and statutory rapists are allowed to easily avoid detection. You are protecting those who prey upon children, and you justification is what MIGHT happen otherwise? What about focusing first on what is happening? )

*
Kristian Stout said
October 9, 2009 at 4:51 pm

Ok, here’s the thing, and I’ve said this before, government has absolutely NO business telling me, or any woman, what I can and cannot do with my body. This is something that should never have been legislated. This should be left to the woman and her concience. If she can live with it it doesn’t matter whether or not anyone else can.

(Kristian, for the most part, I agree with you. I do think partial birth abortion should be banned. But what about a 13 year old?
Should she be able to get an abortion without parental consent?
If yes, should the parents be notified?)

Thought I would share this with all of you. Just received this in my Email box.

Send Obama and Congress
A Personalized Eviction Notice

December 16, 2009 will mark the 236th Anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. On this date in 1773, a patriotic group of Colonists (disguised as Native Americans) boarded ships loaded with Tea from England and dumped it into the Boston Harbor. What became know as “The Boston Tea Party” was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout Colonial America against Britain for levying taxes without a consenting vote from the colonies’ own elected representatives.

236 years later, we have a Congress (and President) who blatantly thumb their noses at the U.S. Constitution and ignore the pleas of the majority of American Citizens. Just like our forefathers who threw Tea overboard in Boston, we’ve identified 9 main reasons why the current Congress should be thrown out in the next election. We want our house back, so we’ve set a goal to send one million eviction notices to The House of Representatives and the Senate before they adjourn this year. We even have an option to send an eviction notice to the White House!

Written in the spirit and style of our historic Declaration of Independence, this Declaration of Eviction will send a clear message to Congress and The President: Listen to your constituents, OR GET EVICTED!

Here are the Nine Grievances we’ve listed in the Declaration of Eviction:

* You have broken your contract with America by violating your oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States by expanding the powers of the Government in exchange for our God-given Liberties.
* You have ignored the pleas of the majority of Americans by forcing a takeover of our private health care industry and exchanging it for a bureaucratic nightmare.
* You are attempting to control our economy by empowering “Pay Czars” to regulate the income of workers.
* You are increasing taxes on small business owners, the life blood of our free economy, while bailing out the banking industry.
* You are overstepping your Constitutional Boundaries by agreeing with this present Administration to seize control of private industries, such as banking, automobile manufacturing, and health care.
* You have jeopardized the international value of our currency with deficit spending.
* You have failed to secure our national defense by refusing to tap the vast natural resources within our own borders and off our own shores.
* You have punished citizens and private business establishments with further regulation with hysteria and false claims of “climate change”.
* You have borrowed against our children’s future for political gain today

A little story that I rarely tell. As I have aged, I have lost many loved ones, as many of you have. As I continue to age, I will no doubt lose more. Death is, sadly, a part of our lives. It’s never easy, never liked, and the one thing we do not look forward too.

In my younger days, I’ve seen many musicians at live concerts, and have been lucky to actually meet many of them in person. On August 13, 1999, I was visiting relatives and friends at my Uncle’s home not far from where I lived. As the party was a fun one, the hair clippers came out and a few got some nice , rather short haircuts. One was my 4 year old cousin, almost 5 at the time.

As the evening progressed, I was challenged to call the local radio sation and get a song played on air within an hour. I won the bet.

On August 15, 1999, my 4 year old cousin was killed while riding his bike on a dead end street. (please, no sorry’s on this!) What I found to be an event that will forever be in my mind, I was holding Cody when the song I requested came on the radio.

With all that said, allow this song to be a tribute to all the loved ones that you have said goodbye to. We will miss them dearly, but they are in a better place.

Darn it G, couldn’t hear the music, I think the speakers blew on the computer. Anyway, I think that was indeed a sad story. This just happens to be the 17th year since my brother passed away, and the same exact date that My mother in law has passed. On top of all that, they are bringing PFC. Kevin Thompson’s body home today. He was one of the 8 that was killed in Afghanistan last weekend.

PFC. Thompson worked at our local Scolaris, and although I didn’t know him personally, he was there the few times I went there. He helped bag my groceries, and occasionally helped me out to my car. He went to the same high school as my son Matthew, in fact, he was one year younger than Matthew, Kevin was 22 years old, was in the Army and will be missed dearly by his family, friends, and those who worked with him and loved him. I couldn’t believe it when I saw his face in the paper and on the news that it was him. My heart goes out to his family and to all those who knew him and loved him. My thoughts and prayers are with them at this sad time.

Oh, G, I bet you had music to that too, didn’t you. I lost the sound to my speakers, and that upsets me to think I can’t hear any of the music you play.

That was a beautiful tribute to all those who have fallen. I’m getting really teary eyed here, but I can’t help it. Maybe because of what this day means to me. The date in which my brother died, and the same for Jim’s mom, and because of PFC Thompson. My heart is just sunk right now.

Did anyone ever consider the possibility that a black person being accused of racism – could actually be a racist? And if that black person has displayed racist actions – is it still wrong to call that person a racist?..because it is divisive? Everyone is sure there are white racists – KKK members, skinheads….racist…is that divisive or the truth? How do you sugarcoat this truth?

I watched Fox news one day, right after the election, 2 black teenagers came on and were giggling, one said, we voted, for Obama, because he is black as we are so we voted for him. racist? My suggestio change voting age, 18 only for military, all others back to 21. I also heard Rush he said I want Obama’s principles to fail, not him personally, he was giving his opinion. Beck also I watch he gives every person a chance to voice their own opinion. I do think Obama is taking advantage of lots of people, he has trashed the economy with Acorn threatening banks to give people huge loans that had no visible income, then when they can’t pay, they trash house, walk away. That is what Acorn does threatens, I guess I am a terrorist, as I am a veteran of ww2, Marine female, and I hate abortion, gays confuse me and makes me wonder, why, Our Lord says it is an abomination, why? Politicans are always lying, some you can tell they are some not, but I do think the whole population got lazy, one election, presidential, years ago, only 33 percent of eligible voters, actually went and voted, now in my humble opinion that is lazy, to let so many others rule you, just because you are too busy, votint was won by many dedicated people, if you want freedom in any form, you must first get rid of Acorn, then no matter how busy, VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!

First up I wanted to respond to the notion of ‘racism.’ And just for the record I think my definition would be quite similar to US Weapon’s.

However, no matter what the percentages or statistics may claim all of us should remember that numbers are manipulated to prove a point rather than for objective purposes. Therefore, this one-in-ten rubbish and/or comparing the same numbers in different areas with different ideologies is just plain weak.

Mathius, God love ya’ and I sure do, but, some of your thinking is really out there. Zoneland style. I have lived up close and personal with every situation you’ve drawn to vis-a-vie Watts, Rodney King, and a hell of lot more. Yet, while I was walking in the deep southern portion of our country in support of the Civil Rights movement – at the same time being attacked by (Hoover’s) FBI – yelling, beating, and screaming at me wondering ‘what are you doing here, hippie’ amoungst other identifiers.

I believe that anytime a member of the human race is given some kind of empowerment, face it, we all are going to use it. Therefore, Affirmative Action, Welfare, and other government subsidies had their place in the US society for a while. Any person who believes in this ‘black-brown-pink-yellow’ oppression b/s anymore in this country is in fact a ‘colorist.’

And lastly for the last two years we’ve been conducting a longitudinal study on racism in the USA. Overwhelmingly the results show that blacks and browns are far more racist than their counterparts.

I was a victim (I firmly feel) of racism (I refuse to call it reverse racism) at two seperate jobs. I chose to leave both rather than fight corporate human resource departments that couldn’t be more phony (using “African-American” at every opportunity, except for when they slipped and said “black”). The first instance was my original turn to the right (more conservative side of me). I had just returned to the legitimate world (for good) and was completely turned off by what I witnessed (here I’ll be making an argument for USW in his debate with me–which I’m delinquent on right now). There were a few people with a good work ethic who just did their jobs and far more who did everything possible to skate their responsibilities and let others pick up the slack. It turned me off no end. The Gore-Bush election was coming up and I said to myself: “How can I be on the same page as these people?”

I wasn’t. I voted for Bush but admit it had more to do with my contempt for Clinton and the Democrats by then.

I became a target and I knew too well what I faced in the human resources dept; essentially people who’d already sold their soul to the firm. There was no point in being that pissed off every night and there was plenty of work available. I moved on. A few years later I switched jobs again and was hired into a firm that took care of racial quotas by hiring predominantly minority in their service departments (because 97% of the lawyers were white). Things were fine for a while, but when managers were switched (black to black–but the 2nd manager was personally connected to her supervisors–also black). I found myself getting the bulk of the work again. Then I was accused of saying white people get all the cherry-picked big jobs. I was told that in a human resource meeting. I told them, “That’s a lie. I never said it, but it happens to be true.” A week later, I moved on to another firm and haven’t experienced it again since.

Three cowboys were seated around the campfire out on the lonesome sagebrush prairie and with the pride for which these men were famous; it was a night of bravado, a night of tall tales..

Tom, the hand from Idaho says, ‘I must be the strongest, meanest, toughest cowboy there is. Why, just the other day, a bull got loose in the corral. It had gored six men before I wrestled it to the ground by the horns with my bare hands and castrated that sucker with my teeth.’

Ben, from Montana, couldn’t stand to be bested.. That’s nothing, ‘I was walking down the trail yesterday and a 15 foot diamondback rattler slid out from under a rock and made a move for me. I grabbed that bastard with my bare hands, bit off its head, and sucked the poison down in one gulp and didn’t even get a belly ache.’

Old Dungus Bob, the cowboy from Wyoming, remained silent, slowly stirring the campfire coals with his pecker.

Glad you got you sound back. Busy today splittin wood, all done with that now. I’m sure you’ve figured out that I like music alot, especially during those trying times in life. I tend to emerse myself in it. Miss the days when I DJ’d, had a blast doing that. Might as well throw one up, things are slow. Enjoy!

I put up a bunch of vids, maybe the system only allows so many. I DJ’d on military bases in VA and in Panama. Panama was the bomb. Got paid alot of money to go into Panama City, Panama to play American Rock. They loved it down there. Being single at the time was a wonderful thing, if you know what I mean!

There’s another one I like too. It’s called Wake Me When September Is Gone, byt Green Day, I think.

Matthew put that on the video he and SGT Chapman put together while he was in Iraq. He put it at the very end to honor those 5 guys he knew that got killed while he was there. All 5 of them were from his unit.

Go to you tube and type in the 1/4 and it should come up. If you get it, you will hear a guy say Roger, that’s Matthew. Got to go for w while, but will be back later. Hey, why just Email each other. In fact I will Email you when we get back. Going to go get get something to eat. Matthew wants to use the computer while he’s doing his laundry. BYW, his camera took a dump, battery crapped out. Catch you when I get back okay,
‘Judy

Did you by any chance go on you tube to see if you can find that video? Matthew said you have to not just type in the 1/4, but you have to type in 1st Battalion First Marines and the video should be the first one and pop up.

But, I didn’t really see the cop hit the kid, just laid on him and hold him down. And yes, it was astonishing that nobody came to help the kid. What was the kid suppose to have done anyway. As for him being in jail for rape, hope he gets what’s coming to him. That’s what make me angry about cops, they think that sometimes, they are above the law.

I am not saying this cop is a good guy, but the “child has a history of violent behavior”, has this been disputed? The officer claims that the boy hit him in the face and broke his glasses. I could see the officer bending down to pick something up off the floor. And it seems to me that every person that was there helped the officer which means that they may have felt that the officer was right and the teenager was wrong.

It seems to me that there are always two sides to every story. “Special Needs” is a loaded description which implies that the boy was slow or defenseless. Remember that special needs can also be used to describe kids with behavioral issues. What I read said the boy had trouble learning, but the interview with him didn’t show me a mentally slow kid or one that couldn’t be dangerous if he wanted to.

It is interesting that earlier this week, citing the tremendous violence of Chicago youth, and the inaction of the police officers who you claimed were standing there watching, you were accusing them of being wrong for not reacting. In the same city, with the same deadly youth population, you now have issue with a police officer reacting to those youth because it is too harsh. I suppose the officer could have waited for the kid to pull a gun or knife before reacting. However, I can honestly say that if I were an officer in a school in Chicago, I would probably react on the harsh side given the videos I have seen coming out of that city.

Again, I am not attempting to defend the officer’s integrity, he is obviously a dirtbag given the other charges against him. But there are always several sides to the story in a case like this. I would be interested in hearing the statements from the others who were helping the police officer.

I don’t hate anybody because of his or her color. I feel anger towards anybody who is destroying my country that I have lived in for 85 years, now working on destroying the defense of marriage act, now trying to take away freedom of speech from the constitution, if any other person did this I would feel the same way. Maybe I am a terrorist, as Janet napolitano says, as I am a veteran, I dislike abortion, don’t understand the homosexual lifestyle, so guess as a terrorist, they will behead me as Obama’s family wants as he is a Muslim and most everybody on this site knows it. I feel I am living in 2 worlds, tv lies about all things, internet, some lies but mostly the truth as I see it. I also belong to a group Christians United for Israel, and guess all the people that post know how I feel about Israel, I believe the Bible and God gave this land to his people, the Israelites and the Palestines are mostly Arabs who have taken advantage of this and left their own countries and moved into Israel, the Jews are good to them, they have everything the Jews have, kids have schooling etc. Yet the Jews are constantly bombarded with insults and assults etc. But Jesus said in his book of instruction: You will be hated for my sake. and this is true. All I can say is God Bless USA, God Bless Israel and also bless all who post caring and concerned sites.

Does anybody remember WW@, in the Battle of the Bulge we lost over 50,000 men, listen people who posts, WAR IS UTTER HELL, no music no jokes, except if you are still alive, my brother-in-law in this battle and we were surprised he got home in one piece. Before he went in service he was too squeamish to kill a rabbit, when he came home, he had no problem at all. He killed to survive. If the girls in Afganistan have to walk 5 paces behind a man, any man, and if they are raped, who is killed, not the man, the girl for enticing the man. Women have no life in those countries, Saddam had the rape rooms, they found them, Girls maybe we will have to get used to not wearing pants, jeans etc. and wear head scarves, burkas as we are women and we might entice the men around us. Crap, lets help them if possible, I don’t agree with anybody to lets go to war, have fun, crap, when I was in the Marine Corps. during ww2, it is serious business, to learn how to survive and as tht is the last war we have won, some of the fighting spirit to win has gone out of Americans, the leadership in Vietnam told the soldiers, we are not in this to win. Now yell at me Vets, I am not critizing anybody just how I feel, truthful and even though some think this Afgan war is not winnable, we must try to help our neighbor, read the Bible and you will find out who your neighbor is.

Goldie! Fear not, I’m one of the assholes that want freedom, and will get it. Your safe in my world, as I will explain to Judy.

Judy, They don’t want me anywhere near a war. I’m a caring person, but don’t much trust in others. My knowledge in killing is deep, and uncaring. I really don’t care if I have to shoot someone, if they deserve it. Black Flag, in many ways, is against violence. I too, agree. Only when it is needed, should one kill another. I’ll get killed on this, but, I’d rather fight than be consumed with violence. I’d rather fight than run! I won’t run, so I reckon I’m destined to fight.

And that is what makes you who you are, why change because somebody does not agree with you. If everybody felt the same way G, we would be a very boring, sad group of people. You have a passion with the way you feel, just as Black Flag has a passion about the way he feels. Two totally different people, but yet in some ways I think feel the same, given the circumstance on how you would defend yourself or your family.

I think if I had to defend myself or a family member, I would do the same. It would have to come down to either me or them, and I know it would be me, I don’t think. I don’t have the training that you do, but I think if I had to, I would fight with all my might. Does that make any sense to you? As you know, I’m a very passionate person when it comes to my beliefs, and nothing or anybody will change that. I have gone a few rounds with people about certain things, some things I have had some deep thought on, and did change my way of thinking, but on others, I hold my ground on.

GREENSBORO, N.C. — Authorities say a 44-year-old North Carolina man spent a week in jail because he has the same name as a suspect 23 years younger.

The News & Record of Greensboro reported Saturday that Jesse Ray Hardy Jr. of Greenville was arrested Monday, then taken to jail 160 miles away to face charges of resisting an officer, breaking and entering and failing to yield to a pedestrian.

Court officials say the real suspect shares the same name and hometown, but is not related.

The mix-up wasn’t realized until Friday, despite court appearances in both Pitt and Guilford counties.

Judge Susan Bray apologized to Hardy as she worked to get him released.

New topic for a Sunday morning. I have personally seen injustice occur several times, not because of any ill intent, but because of laziness. Bureaucrats with the weight of the law, receiving poor pay (they have benefits though)with no incentive to perform well. No accountability, no black marks for poor performance.

And this is not limited to law enforcement, look at our air craft controllers, that NY plane/helicopter crash has the responsible controller chatting on tape about grilling steak. Apply this thought to medicare, why is there so much fraud? The bureaucrats
have no reason to care if a claim is valid or bogus, apparently their only grade comes from the number they process(or is it the number of times they respond to a request, seems it takes three request to be paid each time).

I think this explains some (not all ) of how private insurance companies operate as well. Indifferent bureaucracies, the death mechanism of American culture?

And that is why my mom lives with us. She is 87, has some Dementia, but I’ll be damned if she was going to go into some place where God knows what could/would happen to her. At least I know she’s being taken care of, since I’m the one who is doing it. That would be the last thing I would ever do to her.